Case 2:17-cv-00085-JAD-CWH Document 140 Filed 08/20/18 Page 1 of 2

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA
5 ***
6 MARK HUNT, Case No. 2:17-cv-00085-JAD-CWH
7 Plaintiff,
ORDER
8 v.
9 ZUFFA, LLC, et al.,
10 Defendants.
11

12 Presently before the court is defendants Zuffa, LLC and Mark White’s renewed motion

13 for leave to file exhibits under seal and to redact a portion of their reply in support thereof (ECF

14 No. 135), filed on August 1, 2018. Plaintiff did not file a response.

15 Defendants previously filed a motion to seal various exhibits in support of their pending

16 motion to dismiss, arguing that the exhibits were subject to confidentiality agreements. (ECF

17 Nos. 114, 129). The court denied their request without prejudice and ordered the clerk of court to

18 maintain the exhibits under seal for 14 days. (ECF No. 133.) Defendants now move to renew

19 their motions to seal exhibits in support of their motion to dismiss and to redact a portion of their

20 reply. (ECF No. 135.) Defendants argue that compelling reasons support their request to seal the

21 exhibits and their reply.

22 Generally, the public has a right to inspect and copy judicial records. Kamakana v. City &

23 Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). Such records are presumptively publicly

24 accessible. Id. Consequently, a party seeking to seal a judicial record “bears the burden of

25 overcoming this strong presumption.” Id. In the case of dispositive motions, the party seeking to

26 seal the record “must articulate compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings that

27 outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure, such as the

28 public interest in understanding the judicial process.” Id. at 1178-79 (alteration and internal
 Case 2:17-cv-00085-JAD-CWH Document 140 Filed 08/20/18 Page 2 of 2

1 quotation marks and citations omitted). Among the compelling reasons which may justify sealing

2 a record are “when such court files might have become a vehicle for improper purposes, such as

3 the use of records to gratify private spite, promote public scandal, circulate libelous statements, or

4 release trade secrets.” Id. at 1179 (quotation omitted).

5 Here, defendants move to seal exhibits that contain agreements between defendant Zuffa

6 and plaintiff, and to redact a portion of their reply that quotes an agreement. Defendants claim

7 that the agreements contain proprietary information, and that public disclosure would harm

8 Zuffa’s contractual relationships with other fighters and its competitive standing with MMA

9 promoters. The court finds that defendants have identified compelling reasons that warrant

10 sealing the exhibits attached to their motion to dismiss, and redacting a portion of their reply in

11 support thereof. Therefore, the court will grant defendants renewed motion to seal.

12 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED defendants Zuffa, LLC and Mark White’s renewed

13 motion for leave to file exhibits under seal and to redact a portion of their reply in support thereof

14 (ECF No. 135) is GRANTED.

15

16 DATED: August 20, 2018

17

18 C.W. HOFFMAN, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
19
20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page 2 of 2